One need not contrast things as good and bad or right or wrong, but rather one size does not fit all. Institutionalized learning is pretty effective at producing people that can do all the math needed in life to function in most jobs.

For others who want to pursue a career in math different leaning methods help to bring out the "science" of math and how to use math to make discoveries about how the universe works.

We have schools built around the "arts", but not around the science of math and how to use it to make discoveries. Some young people are "wired" for math and struggle to stay awake in a normal class setting. They are ready to "run" when the rest of the class can't walk.

I was one of those people. No talent at the arts but gifted at math. Whether it was playing chess at three years of age and entering adult tournaments at 6 or doing three years of math in three weeks of self-study summer school, my brain simply saw the world through equations. As a career, I reengineered how companies operated.

We use special training techniques to help gifted athletes realize their full potential. It only make sense to help the "math lete" achieve their full potential.

One problem with today's progressive ideology and its emphasis on "equity" is people are not the same. In California there is an effort to eliminate advanced math classes in public schools under the theory that such classes promote racism. The whole things will condemn gfited math students to 12 years of boredom.

It seems obvious that holding a gifted child back does not help the less gifted. If the concern is poor gifted children won't have a chance to take advantage of their gifts, then address that... don't hold the rest back.